On 2012.07.03 14:38, Xiaofan Chen wrote: > I sent the patch both inline and as an attachment using Gmail. > Both are okay from what I see, no extra ">". But maybe you > will see the ">" for the inline version. Did you see the ">" for > my attachment?
Yup. This is how Thunderbird displays the inline version of your patch on my platform: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Here it is. >From 38d5776f728b121ebc0bf9db8da8d745317f55fd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Xiaofan Chen <xiaof...@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 20:46:40 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] Some versions of dlltool may require a library name for libusb-1.0.def even though the library name is optional as specified by Microsoft. This patch adds the library name to libusb-1.0.def. Reference thread in MinGW-w64 mailing list. http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.mingw.w64.general/5141 --- libusb/libusb-1.0.def | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Still, the non inline version (clicking "save as" on the attachment) produces a file that doesn't have the > though, so I don't see it as that much of a problem. Did you also get the > prefix when saving the attachment? And it seems you're also attaching patches in what I would call hybrid mode: with both inline and attachment. Regards, /Pete ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
